So painfully true but recognizing and crying about it won't change a thing.  "Actions speak louder then words."  Begin to act NOW!

How we can understand women’s support for the right in Poland and Hungary

By: Weronika Grzebalska and Eszter Kovats

Editors Note: Recently we contacted Dr. Andrea Peto, Professor in the Department of Gender Studies at Central European University, Vienna, Austria, and a Doctor of Science of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences about questions frequently being posed to us regarding why women support Trump and men like him. While the article focuses on this issue in Hungary and Poland, the opinions expressed are applicable to any country with a strong right wing populace. Dr. Peto suggested this article by Weronika Grzebalska and Eszter Kovats. It's longer than most of our articles but we believe it is well worth reading.

‘What’s wrong with them?’, asked one Guardian columnist who questioned women’s continuing support for the Republican party in the United States. The issue is far from novel, yet the question is regularly echoed by progressive commentators, usually accompanied by a grim story of a patriarchal backlash under right-wing populist governments.

But rather than furthering our understanding of the gendered aspects of rising right-wing populism, this question invites the explaining away of women’s support for these projects in terms of women’s ‘false consciousness’ – unawareness of oppression – or ‘exercising privilege’, meaning the betrayal of gender interests or minority groups for individual gains.

As such, the very question treats women as victims or double agents of patriarchy rather than pushing us to take women and their lives seriously. It also overlooks the ideological complexity of right-wing projects that are not simply anti-women but combine reactionary elements with advancing some of women’s interests. By presenting right-wing women as the problem that demands urgent reaction, it also diverts attention from the structural causes that breed support for right-wing politics among women.

Rather than asking what’s wrong with right-wing women, we should ask: what’s wrong with the politico-economic system they find themselves in, and the political alternatives available to them? Here, Poland and Hungary can provide some insight. In both countries, governing parties Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (PiS), since 2015, and Fidesz-KDNP, since 2010, have engaged in illiberal transformation, dismantling liberal democratic institutions such as the rule of law, colonising the state apparatus, targeting and securitising rights-based civil society and rolling back the liberal infrastructure responsible for women’s rights.

Despite this radical platform, both parties were brought to power by a slightly larger percentage of female than male voters, and enjoy women’s continuous support. As many as 39.7 per cent of Polish women supported PiS in 2015, compared to 38.5 per cent of men, and this number only slightly decreased after two years in power, despite ongoing threats to reproductive rights. In 2018, amid a historically high turnout, 52 per cent of women voted for Fidesz-KDNP, compared to 46 per cent of men. How can we make sense of this continued support?

They don’t vote solely as women

First and foremost: the political reality obscured by popular feminist discourse is that voters’ problems cut across gendered lines and are often determined by wider socio-economic divides. Women vote for these parties not solely as women but because of problems and hopes they share with men from their national collective or social class, reminding us of the limitations of political projects based on a construct of women’s interests alone. As a recent Hungarian study points out, the most pressing problems women highlight are exploitation on the labour market and the poor state of healthcare and education systems.

These issues, of course, have an underlying gendered dimension – such as the feminisation of certain low-paid jobs or care work falling on women’s shoulders – yet they go beyond it. In a situation where women do not see any parties addressing these gendered problems, they still believe Fidesz-KDNP represents them the best.

If opposition parties are preoccupied with defending crumbling pillars or engaging in business as usual, it’s not surprising that the illiberal right has both men and women on board.

Another answer is that right-wing populists actually address some of women’s practical gender interests: those that Maxine Molyneux saw arising from women’s positioning within the gendered division of labour rather than from a theory of women’s oppression. Both PiS and Fidesz-KNDP went on to undo certain socio-economic consequences of the post-1989 transformation that have affected women in particular, as those primarily responsible for household budgets, children and other care work. In Central Europe, the transition to liberal democracy was intertwined with the adherence to the neoliberal world order that assigned the region a semi-peripheral position.

Among other matters, this took the form of rolling back the state in areas responsible for welfare and public services, resulting in growing commodification for those who could afford it and a refamilialisation for those who couldn’t. These changes empowered some women within their own social class, yet passed on economic burdens of austerity to those of lower economic standing. The dominant cultural feminism made structural problems difficult to formulate. The insecurity and inequality created by this double-faced gender regime is precisely what both illiberal parties of Central Europe have exploited when addressing their female voters.

A successful redistribution effort

The paradigmatic example is Family 500+, a flagship programme PiS launched immediately after coming to power, which offers families an unconditional monthly cash transfer of 500 PLN (€120) for every second and subsequent child until they are 18, and for the first child in families with a monthly income below €190 per family member.

This biggest redistribution policy since 1989 substantially decreased poverty among families with children and received popular support in society. While the opposition rightfully points to its limitations – specifically, a reliance on the traditional family model that underprivileges single parents – the measure proves to the electorate that their government does indeed govern, and has the capacity to push for a new social contract that respects their dignity.

In Hungary, there’s a strong priority for family policy in service of demographic policy. The benefits bound to paid employment – showing a clear preference for non-Roma, heterosexual families with a decent income – have been expanded. As for the lower classes, three measures highlight a tangible effect on the everyday life of women: expansion of the public work programme, providing a monthly income of less than minimum wage but more than allowances; state intervention in the energy sector, resulting in lower utility costs; and a large rise in the minimum wage that also decreased the gender pay gap, with women representing a wide share of the worst-paid sectors.

AUTHORS:  

Your boss now has to accommodate pregnant workers, from morning sickness to abortion care.

By Chabeli Carrazana

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which is now in effect, requires employers provide accommodations to pregnant workers for everything from pregnancy through the postpartum period, including time off to recover.

As of June 27, after more than a decade of advocacy, workplace accommodations for pregnant people are finally law as the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act takes effect. 

The law, which passed in December, requires that employers provide accommodations for pregnancy-related medical conditions, everything from pregnancy to childbirth to postpartum recovery. 

It undoes a previous requirement that said employees must prove they should be accommodated. Instead, the onus will now be on employers to work in good faith with workers to provide accommodations. 

The idea to expand protections dates back to 2011, when Dina Bakst, the cofounder and co-president of A Better Balance: The Work & Family Legal Center, realized pregnant workers who were turning to the organization for help were not sufficiently covered under existing law. It was an issue of racial equity — many were women of color working in low-paying jobs. 

Bakst wrote an op-ed in the New York Times in 2012 suggesting lawmakers pass a law that specifically granted pregnant people a right to accommodations at work rather than make them jump through hoops. The op-ed launched a movement that has been working since then to pass the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which was first introduced in Congress that year. 

Elizabeth Gedmark, the current vice president at A Better Balance who worked with Bakst to do the initial legal research on the law, said the road to passage was difficult because so few people knew anything about the issue. 

“What we heard so frequently was people said, ‘We had no idea this was a problem, that pregnant workers were falling through the gaps in the law,’” Gedmark said. “And then in the last 10 years, we still continued to hear that. We worked to raise awareness about it, but even now as we are making sure that people know about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, there are still some who don’t understand why it was necessary, who thought that it already was covered.” 

Stories of pregnant workers who asked for simple accommodations — a water bottle, a stool or break time — and were then pushed out of jobs helped the movement gain supporters over the years. 

Now, the final version of the law not only clarifies the role employers pay, but offers an expansive set of protections that includes accommodations such as time off from work after childbirth for recovery, effectively creating access to unpaid leave for many workers of color who don’t qualify for federal leave. 

“Especially for low-wage working women and women of color, especially Black and Latina women, there has been generations of undervaluing fair labor, even though that labor is the backbone of our economy,” Gedmark said. “The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is going to change that. We are going to see a shift because pregnancy discrimination will no longer be tolerated.” 

Here is what the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act does and doesn’t cover, what to know about requesting an accommodation and what responsibilities employers have. 

What is the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act? 

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act requires certain employers to offer “reasonable accommodations” to employees in the workplace for medical conditions related to the entire period from pregnancy to postpartum recovery. That includes accommodations for fertility treatments, morning sickness — including hyperemesis, an extremely severe morning sickness and nausea condition — lactation, complications, gestational diabetes, pregnancy loss, postpartum depression and conditions including mastitis, an infection of the breast tissue that typically occurs when breastfeeding. It includes time off to recover from childbirth, as well as time off to access abortion care. 

The law passed Congress as part of an omnibus spending bill in December 2022 and goes into effect June 27. 

Who is covered by the PWFA? 

The law protects those who work for private or public sector employers with 15 employees or more. Congress, federal agencies, employment agencies and labor organizations are all covered, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency tasked with enforcing the law. 

The law does not cover very small employers. The cutoff at 15 employees mirrors other workplace discrimination laws that set the same standard. 

How does the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act close a loophole in the law? 

The main protection under the law is to close an existing loophole and build on the federal law that already protects pregnant people at work, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. Before the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, workers could only get an accommodation if they could prove that another employee was given an accommodation, the result of a 2015 Supreme Court case. 

In that case, Young v. UPS, a pregnant UPS driver requested to lift no more than 20 pounds at the recommendation of her OBGYN and midwife, but UPS denied the request saying it only provided light duty for workplace injuries. The court ultimately sided with the worker but created a standard through which a worker would have to prove the company accommodated a similarly-situated employee.  

Before the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, few workers were able to access those protections — pregnancy is too unique to compare to other workers seeking accommodations for other needs. Similarly, the Americans with Disabilities Act also provides some protections but it limits reasonable accommodations protections to workers with a pregnancy-related disability, such as gestational diabetes or preeclampsia.

The existing laws left many workers, particularly women of color in low-wage jobs, vulnerable and often having to choose between protecting the safety of their pregnancy or losing their job. A Better Balance collected numerous stories over the years of workers who were pushed out of jobs or fired because they requested to be accommodated. 

Now under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a worker also does not need to have a pregnancy-related disability to qualify for protections, they simply need to be pregnant and request an accommodation. 

What are examples of accommodations? 

Examples could be giving a worker additional time to sit, rest, drink, eat or use the bathroom. It could mean relaxing some policies to allow workers a stool to sit on, allow them to wear maternity clothing or allow a water bottle in an area where it’s not typically allowed. Schedule-wise, accommodations could include time off for prenatal appointments, accommodating for morning sickness or allowing remote work if available. 

For workers with jobs that require significant manual labor, transferring workers to light duty or temporarily transferring them to a less physically demanding job would constitute an accommodation.

How much time does the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act allow to recover from childbirth? 

If a worker needs time off to recover from a vaginal delivery or a Cesarean section, they can tap into the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act to take unpaid time off. Their job would be protected during this time, so they could not be fired for taking the time. This is especially important for workers who do not have access to time off through the Family and Medical Leave Act, for example, which offers unpaid time off following the birth of a child but has limitations including a requirement that workers be at a job for a year before they qualify. Under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a worker would qualify for unpaid time off regardless of whether they’ve been at a job for a year. 

The time off would be for the duration of the recovery period. Many people have a first postpartum appointment around six weeks following childbirth, and for C-sections, the recovery can be even longer. 

What kinds of things does the law block employers from doing? 

According to the EEOC, employers cannot require an employee to accept an accommodation without discussing it with them first, nor can they require an employee to take leave if an accommodation is already available that would allow the employee to keep working. 

Employers can’t deny anyone a job because of their accommodation request. 

What if the accommodation is too difficult for the employer to do? 

Employers need to prove that the accommodation would create “undue hardship,” meaning it would be too costly or burdensome on the business to provide. That is going to be a difficult standard to meet because the accommodation is only temporary, Gedmark said. 

“Since this is just a temporary condition, it’s going to be extremely hard for an employer to say, ‘Oh, I couldn’t do that for a few weeks or a month or even a few months,’” she said. “The assumption should really be: This is going to be workable.” 

What is the employer’s responsibility if a worker requests an accommodation? 

Under the law, the employer must engage in an “interactive process,” which is a good-faith conversation to try to help meet the worker’s needs. 

This process removes the onus off the worker: Pregnant workers don’t need to prove that someone else is similarly-situated or even mention the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act at all. It is simply a conversation through any medium (phone, email or in person) in which the employer responds promptly and tries to find an accommodation. 

Is it OK to ask for an accommodation that would mean no longer performing “essential functions”? 

Yes, as long as the worker would be able to perform those functions in the near future — the accommodation is only for a temporary period of time.

How do workers request an accommodation? 

A Better Balance provides sample letters for how employees should communicate with their employer about an accommodation request. Employees may explain that they are requesting an accommodation under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, though they do not need to specifically name the law — simply telling their employer they’re pregnant will suffice. Workers should delineate why they are making the request and what kind of accommodation they would need, including the timeframe they would need it. 

For the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act to apply, it is key that workers tell their employer that they are requesting time off due to something related to pregnancy. Later this year, the EEOC will provide more guidance on whether an employer can legally ask for supporting documentation, such as a note from a health care provider. 

What happens if an employer does not comply? 

Workers can file complaints with the EEOC beginning on June 27. The complaint needs to be related to actions that took place June 27 or later. 

Advocates are asking the EEOC to prioritize Pregnant Workers Fairness Act cases because of their time-sensitive nature. The agency will be releasing its regulations for the law by the end of the year that will further clarify enforcement details. 

If a complaint is filed with the EEOC, the employer will be notified. 

Workers can reach out to A Better Balance’s legal assistance line if they have additional questions at 1-833-633-3222.

The Center for WorkLife Law also runs a free and confidential legal help line for those who have questions on the law. They can email hotline@worklifelaw.org or call 415-703-8276 to leave a message. Services are in English and in Spanish with other languages available upon request. 

Are workers protected from retaliation if they file a complaint under the PWFA? 

Yes. Workers are protected at every stage from retaliation from their employer. Employers cannot retaliate against workers who request an accommodation, who file a complaint, who help with an investigation into another worker’s complaint or who testify to the EEOC. 

What does this mean for state and local laws? 

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act should be seen as a foundation — any local or state law with stronger protections would take precedence over the PWFA. More than 30 states and cities have laws that address accommodations for pregnant employees, according to A Better Balance.

This story was originally published by The 19th*.

https://19thnews.org/

COMMENTARY  FROM  A  BADASS   WOMAN

Do you know economic abuse occurs in 98% of abusive relationships and is the number one reason victims stay in or return to abusive relationships?  Yet, 78% of Americans do not recognize economic abuse as domestic violence.  Perhaps the following statistics will help you understand the seriousness of the problem.

• Between 21-60% of victims of intimate partner violence lose their jobs due to reasons stemming from the abuse.
• A survey by the Corporate Alliance to End Partner Violence found that, of respondents who were victims/survivors, 64% reported their abuse impacted their ability to work; 40% reported their abuser harassed them at work via phone and in person.
• Victims of intimate partner violence lose a total of 8 million days of paid work each year, the equivalent of 32,000 jobs.
• Between 2005 and 2006, 130,000 stalking victims/survivors were asked to leave their jobs as a result of their victimization.
• One study found that up to 50% of victims/survivors of sexual assault either lost or left their jobs after being assaulted.

So what is economic abuse?

Economic abuse is a legally recognized form of domestic abuse. It often takes place in the context of intimate partner violence. It involves the control of a partner or ex-partner’s money, finances and things that money can buy, such as clothing, transport, food and a place to live.

Economic abuse can include exerting control over income, spending, bank accounts, bills and borrowing. It can also include controlling access to and use of things like transport and technology, which allow us to work and stay connected, as well as property and daily essentials like food and clothing. It can include destroying items and refusing to contribute to household costs.  

This type of abuse is a form of coercive and controlling behavior. It can continue long after a leaving and can have lifelong effects.  

Economic abuse rarely happens in isolation and usually occurs alongside other forms of abuse, including physical, sexual and psychological abuse. 95% of cases of domestic abuse involve economic abuse.  

This type of abuse is designed to create economic instability and/or make one partner economically dependent, which limits their freedom. Without access to money and the things that money can buy, it is difficult to leave an abuser and access safety. Someone experiencing this type of abuse can become trapped in a relationship with the abuser, unable to resist the abuser’s control and at risk of further harm. In this way, economic safety underpins physical safety.   

The impact of economic abuse makes rebuilding lives challenging. Many women leave with nothing — having no money even for essentials — and have to start again from scratch. Many victim-survivors leave with large amounts of debt and poor credit ratings, affecting their long-term economic stability, and many are unable to maintain savings that provide economic security.  

Economic abuse can take many forms. An abuser might do any of the following:  

Sabotage your income and access to money:  

• prevent you from being in education or employment  
• limit your working hours 
• take your pay  
• Do you know
• refuse to let you claim benefits  
• take children’s savings or birthday money  
• refuse to let you access a bank account  

Restrict how you use money and the things that you own: 

• control when and how money is spent  
• dictate what you can buy   
• make you ask for money or provide an allowance  
• check your receipts  
• make you keep a spending diary  
• make you justify every purchase made  
• control the use of property, such as a mobile phone or car   
• insist all economic assets (eg savings, house) are in their name   

• keep financial information secret  

  Exploit your economic situation:  

• steal your money or property  
• cause damage to your property
• refuse to contribute to household costs   
• spend money needed for household items and bills  
• misuse money in joint bank accounts  
• insist all bills, credit cards and loans are in your name and make you pay them  

• build up debt in your name, sometimes without your knowledge  

   

  Are you in an Economically Abusive Relationship?

  If you are in an abusive relationship and are interested in taking steps towards financial independence, check out the following tips, adapted from Hope & Power for Your Personal Finances: A Rebuilding Guide Following Domestic Violence (also available en Espanol).

  jj